Date   

moderated Re: Paid groups join flow

 

On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 12:09 PM, Shal Farley wrote:
I just realized that NP also means No Post. Maybe that's not a problem since one is a subscription status and the other is a posting privilege. Still, it may be better to come up with something else.
I'm not going to have a paid group, so i have no stake in this, but what about US (for unsettled) and/or S for settled.
 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


moderated Re: (Groups.io) Feed; a Possible Limitation

Sharon Villines
 

I frequently advise my members about what features are useful and which might be confusing.

This also brings up a discussion of features that they were unaware of and would like to use.

The feed might be more useful in a workplace setting where one has to keep up with discussions on various subgroups.

Sharon
----
Sharon Villines, Washington DC

"We are confronted with insurmountable opportunities.” — Walt Kelly

On Mar 28, 2019, at 12:28 PM, Chris Jones via Groups.Io <chrisjones12=btinternet.com@groups.io> wrote:
One option might be to increase the number of "Active" topics listed, although the cut - off point will still be a bit arbitrary; on the face of it 10 doesn't seem excessive but it would have the downside of making the Feed page that much longer.

A second option might be to change the title Active Topics to 5 Most Recent Posts; the more I think about it the more I like that, although it might be a bit too subtle for subscribers to realise that there might be more if they take the trouble to look.

Chris


moderated Re: Paid groups join flow

 

I wrote:


Maybe that becomes an account page for payments, where the user gets to manage them.

I suppose that could be a tab in the user's Subscription page for that group instead.

That might make for a more natural landing page after the user clicks the Request button. It seems like fair game for a NP (Not Paid) member to access the Subscription page even though they can't yet access group content.

Damn. I just realized that NP also means No Post. Maybe that's not a problem since one is a subscription status and the other is a posting privilege. Still, it may be better to come up with something else.

Shal


moderated Re: Paid groups join flow

Andy Wedge
 

On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 06:16 PM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
Am I missing anything?
 
There is no reference to subgroups here and I seem to recall a recent change to allow members invited to join a subgroup to be automatically added to the main group. Is that route in covered by this proposed feature?

Andy


moderated Re: Visibility of Menus

 

Sharon,


The Groups.io menus are less visually noticeable than they could be. The content  on the page contains lots of blue and white space, various symbols ( [ … etc.

Can you cite (or better, screenshot) an example? I'm looking around and not seeing what you describe, though it may be right in front of me.
Shal


moderated Re: Paid groups join flow

 

Mark,


For restricted groups, I propose that it also happens when they click on the Apply For Membership button, and before they get a pending subscription.

Given the above, no activity record would be generated before someone selects/pays for a subscription. Is that ok?

For restricted groups, the person would be paying for the subscription before you approve/deny them. If you deny them, then you'd have to also refund their subscription, which is an extra step. Is that ok?

Both of those seem problematic to me.

If you go the route of payment before approval I think the refund if rejected would have to be automatic - not subject to the group admin's volition.

But I recognize the difficulty in requiring approval first: that breaks the flow and incurs an arbitrary delay (for a moderator response). How would the applicant resume processing?

That might take something like the Existing Transfers list, where the applicant could come back later to process payments for group memberships as they are approved (we'd have to assume the user could apply to more than one paid group at a time). Maybe that becomes an account page for payments, where the user gets to manage them.

If you want to approve them before they pay, then I think we'd have to add an additional subscription type (like normal, pending, banned). Something shorter than 'pending on payment' maybe.

Perhaps "Not Paid", with characteristics similar to "Not Confirmed" - no posting or access. And perhaps also with the ability of the group admins to waive/reduce the required payment.

Am I missing anything?

Undoubtedly.

Eventually there's the whole flow when it is time for the member to renew. That probably also speaks to an account page to manage the paid subscriptions (which renewals are due soon?).
Shal


moderated Paid groups join flow

 

Hi All,

I'm working to finish up the new feature that will allow group owners to charge subscriptions or ask for donations of their members. I have a question about how the flow should go for someone joining one of these groups. Subscribe by email will be disabled for groups that charge subscriptions.

Right now, the join a group via the website flow is as follows (ignoring logged out vs logged in):

1) Person clicks the Join This Group/Apply For Membership button
2) They are either added directly to the group, or if it's restricted, they are given a pending subscription.

Where should I put the step in where they select a paid subscription and pay for it? For non-restricted groups, it seems straightforward: after they click the Join This Group button, but before they are given a subscription to the group.

For restricted groups, I propose that it also happens when they click on the Apply For Membership button, and before they get a pending subscription.

Given the above, no activity record would be generated before someone selects/pays for a subscription. Is that ok?

For restricted groups, the person would be paying for the subscription before you approve/deny them. If you deny them, then you'd have to also refund their subscription, which is an extra step. Is that ok? If you want to approve them before they pay, then I think we'd have to add an additional subscription type (like normal, pending, banned). Something shorter than 'pending on payment' maybe.

Am I missing anything?

Thanks,
Mark


moderated Re: (Groups.io) Feed; a Possible Limitation

KWKloeber
 

<<This page might be more aptly titled ‘recent activity.’>>

ya, that change is what I had previously suggested!!

The obvious answer, though maybe impractical or impossible, is for the feed to display whatever has occurred since the individual USER last loooked at the feed page and/or last opened the most recent msg in a displayed topic.  

Da puppy IS trained -to pee where it wants to. LOL.
excuse the preposition. 


moderated Visibility of Menus

Sharon Villines
 

The Groups.io menus are less visually noticeable than they could be. The content on the page contains lots of blue and white space, various symbols ( [ … etc.

The menus are gray and the text seems smaller — though it may be the effect of the color and variation of the main content. If the point size were 1-2 points larger I don’t think I would have to point out the menu to people as often, if ever. The addition of a standard color for the menu background might also help. I like the nice clean black, white, and blue palette, but a pale grey or blue wouldn’t clutter or distract.

Sharon
----
Sharon Villines, Washington DC

"Design is the first sign of human intention." William McDonough


moderated Re: (Groups.io) Feed; a Possible Limitation

Chris Jones
 

On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 04:42 PM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
Perhaps you are arguing for an augmented version of the All Topics display instead?
 
Is that a reference to the View All option? I'm not sure how you would augment it; I am just thinking about something (anything?) that would advise users that the Active Topic list might well not be the full story.

Chris


moderated Re: (Groups.io) Feed; a Possible Limitation

 

I would favor an augmented version but only if the increased number is user-customizable by group. Otherwise, the problem of having to scroll through a large area for a group or groups one may have little interest in only gets worse. 


On Mar 28, 2019, at 9:42 AM, Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:

Chris,

On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 8:14 AM Chris Jones via Groups.Io <chrisjones12=btinternet.com@groups.io> wrote:

Any Subscriber working solely from the Feed might easily miss what is still an active topic because it has been pushed off the bottom of the list; OK it might pop up again sometime later, but again it may not. In the meantime unless our specimen subscriber goes to Topics view the posts to the "busy" topic risk not being seen.

Perhaps you are arguing for an augmented version of the All Topics display instead?

Thanks,
Mark 

--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


moderated Re: (Groups.io) Feed; a Possible Limitation

 

Chris,

On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 8:14 AM Chris Jones via Groups.Io <chrisjones12=btinternet.com@groups.io> wrote:

Any Subscriber working solely from the Feed might easily miss what is still an active topic because it has been pushed off the bottom of the list; OK it might pop up again sometime later, but again it may not. In the meantime unless our specimen subscriber goes to Topics view the posts to the "busy" topic risk not being seen.

Perhaps you are arguing for an augmented version of the All Topics display instead?

Thanks,
Mark 


moderated Re: Reply to Sender

Sharon Villines
 

On Mar 28, 2019, at 12:19 PM, ro-esp <ro-esp@dds.nl> wrote:

Mark, the only thing I am used to seeing when people use "reply to sender" is them adding "off-list" to the subjectline.
I like “off list” but it might not be clear that if it is off-list, who it is going to. “Reply to sender off-list” is the clearest.

Private does sound like “secret.” Some communicated information that is being concealed.

Sharon
----
Sharon Villines, Washington DC
"We're only the light bulbs, and our job is just to remain screwed in.” Bishop Desmond Tutu


moderated Re: (Groups.io) Feed; a Possible Limitation

 

Or the user could customize that number.

The real issue, I think, is that this feed is not a real feed. A real feed is infinite. This page might be more aptly titled ‘recent activity.’


On Mar 28, 2019, at 9:28 AM, Chris Jones via Groups.Io <chrisjones12@...> wrote:

On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 03:16 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
I don't know what the solution is.
In truth neither do I!

One option might be to increase the number of "Active" topics listed, although the cut - off point will still be a bit arbitrary; on the face of it 10 doesn't seem excessive but it would have the downside of making the Feed page that much longer. 

A second option might be to change the title Active Topics to 5 Most Recent Posts; the more I think about it the more I like that, although it might be a bit too subtle for subscribers to realise that there might be more if they take the trouble to look.

Chris

--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


moderated Downtime this morning #outage

 

Hi All,

Well that was fun. Here's what I know right now. At 8:28am pacific time, one of the back end machines appeared to freeze up in a weird way. This machine takes all changes to the main database and inserts them into the search cluster (new messages, new activity logs, etc). For some reason that I do not know yet and really do not understand how, this caused a chain of events to happen that started eating up all connections to the main database. This effectively took the site down at 8:34am, which is when I got paged the first time. It took me some time to figure out that the machine was frozen in a weird way and to reboot it. The site came back at 8:52am.

The site is functioning normally and all email sent to groups during this time should have been queued and resent after the site was back.

Thanks,
Mark


moderated Re: (Groups.io) Feed; a Possible Limitation

Chris Jones
 

On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 03:16 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
I don't know what the solution is.
In truth neither do I!

One option might be to increase the number of "Active" topics listed, although the cut - off point will still be a bit arbitrary; on the face of it 10 doesn't seem excessive but it would have the downside of making the Feed page that much longer. 

A second option might be to change the title Active Topics to 5 Most Recent Posts; the more I think about it the more I like that, although it might be a bit too subtle for subscribers to realise that there might be more if they take the trouble to look.

Chris


moderated Re: Reply to Sender

ro-esp
 

Mark, the only thing I am used to seeing when people use "reply to sender" is them adding "off-list" to the subjectline. I'm not aware of any custom adding "DM", and "private" SOUNDS like it's something else... like you don't want to "tell" the rest of the group.

So unless there is some custom somewhere outside my view, I think it would be most prudent to just let it say "off-list"

[and looking at the private-button now, I think it should have another colour. Why not the same green as the "reply to group" one?]


groetjes, Ronaldo


moderated Re: Maintain Defaults Whenever Practical #suggestion

 

On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 08:14 AM, Gerald Boutin wrote:
it almost seems that users are not aware that the initial landing page is still there
Very good point. It still being there is not what saves this situation, though. It's that it's still there but clickless - in other words, as you say here:

You will now only go to the Feed page if you specifically choose to go there.
That was not the case prior to the change..
 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


moderated Re: (Groups.io) Feed; a Possible Limitation

 

That's a really good point, and something that had been unconsciously bothering me. I know there are a few really active topics in my group that have failed to appear. I don't know what the solution is.
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


moderated Re: Maintain Defaults Whenever Practical #suggestion

Gerald Boutin <groupsio@...>
 

By all of the "hate" comments, it almost seems that users are not aware that the initial landing page is still there and has not been changed or removed. This is just a new view, feel free not to use it.

If you found yourself apparently stuck on the Feed view, click on the "Your Groups" choice on the left side of the page and you are back to the safety of the previous landing page. You will now only go to the Feed page if you specifically choose to go there.

--
Gerald

8901 - 8920 of 29448